DOCSLIB.ORG

(The RMA) and in the MATTER of Notices O

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
(The RMA) and in the MATTER of Notices O BEFORE A BOARD OF INQUIRY EAST WEST LINK PROJECT UNDER the Resource Management Act 1991 (the RMA) AND IN THE MATTER OF Notices of requirement for designation and resource consent applications by the NEW ZEALAND TRANSPORT AGENCY for the East West Link Project STATEMENT OF PRIMARY EVIDENCE OF ANDREW PETER MURRAY ON BEHALF OF THE NEW ZEALAND TRANSPORT AGENCY Walking and Cycling Dated: 12th April 2017 Barristers and Solicitors Auckland Solicitor Acting: Pat Mulligan Email: [email protected] Tel 64 9 358 2555 Fax 64 9 358 2055 PO Box 1433 DX CP24024 Auckland 1140 CONTENTS 1. SUMMARY OF EVIDENCE 1 2. INTRODUCTION 3 3. CODE OF CONDUCT 3 4. SCOPE OF EVIDENCE 3 PART A: PROJECT DEVELOPMENT AND DESCRIPTION 4 5. OVERVIEW OF THE PROJECT AND MY ROLE 4 PART B: ASSESSMENT OF EFFECTS ON THE ENVIRONMENT 11 6. ASSESSMENT METHODOLOGY 11 7. EXISTING ENVIRONMENT 11 8. ASSESSMENT OF EFFECTS AND PROPOSED MITIGATION 12 PART C: RESPONSES 32 9. RESPONSE TO AUCKLAND COUNCIL'S 149 ISSUES REPORT/OTHER REPORTS 32 10. RESPONSE TO SUBMISSIONS 32 11. SUMMARY 37 12. CONCLUSION 39 ATTACHMENT 1 40 ATTACHMENT 2 42 BF\56832919\1 Page 1 1. SUMMARY OF EVIDENCE 1.1 This statement describes the development of the walking and cycling elements of the Project, the existing network issues and the outcomes and effects of the Project in relation to walking and cycling. It addresses how the Project meets the key Project Objective 2: To improve safety and accessibility for cycling and walking between Māngere Bridge, Onehunga and Sylvia Park, and accessing Ōtāhuhu East: 1.2 The walking and cycling elements were developed in an iterative way, in coordination with the other elements of the Project design. It considered the Project Objectives, the key desire lines identified in the Urban and Landscape Design Framework (ULDF) and feedback from the public and stakeholders such as Auckland Transport, Auckland Council and Bike Auckland. 1.3 The assessment of the existing facilities identified a number of key issues, including: (a) Minor network gap on Orpheus Drive where pedestrians and cyclists have to use this lightly trafficked road; (b) A network gap for cyclists between the cul-de-sac end of Onehunga Mall and to the key destinations of Onehunga Town Centre / train Station, with the very high truck and traffic flows contributing to poor amenity on this route for both cyclists and pedestrians; (c) The Waikaraka Cycleway ending at Hugo Johnston Drive, without direct connections to key destinations such as Mutukāroa-Hamlins Hill and Sylvia Park Town Centre; (d) No safe crossings of the busy Mt Wellington Highway for the 1.3km section between Panama Road and Sylvia Park Town Centre (e) Poor and unsafe movements crossing SH1 at Princes Street to access Ōtāhuhu East and no connectivity east of SH1 between Ōtāhuhu East and the northern communities of Panama Road; and (f) Narrow footpaths on the Panama Road motorway overbridge. 1.4 The Project proposes creating over 25km of new or enhanced walking and cycling facilities, which is a significant addition to the existing network of only 12km of typically BF\56832919\1 Page 1 lower-standard facilities. This includes an additional 5km of shared path, 2.7km of new cycleway, an additional 2.6km of footpath and 3.1km of new recreational paths. 1.5 Although there are some existing high-quality facilities (such as the Waikaraka cycleway), there are significant gaps in the network, especially for off-road cycling facilities. The Project improves connectivity on the key links in the network, with over 3km of walking and over 5km of cycling gaps in the network being completed. 1.6 The Project would enable cycling trips to be made on off-road facilities for the full 6km journey between Taumanu Reserve and Mt Wellington Highway near the Sylvia Park Town Centre. 1.7 Based on the assessment in Technical Report 01 (TR01) of the AEE, I consider that the Project will significantly improve safety and accessibility for cycling and walking between Māngere Bridge, Onehunga Town Centre and Sylvia Park Town Centre by providing high quality, off-road and continuous links connecting these key destinations. New and enhanced north-south connections will improve connectivity to the Māngere foreshore from the residential communities north of Neilson Street, including at Onehunga Mall and Alfred Street. There will also be significant connectivity and safety improvements for the communities of Ōtāhuhu East, both via the existing route over SH1 at Princes Street, but also with a wholly new access provided east of SH1 to the adjacent community of Panama Road. I consider that these will offer not only significantly improved accessibility for these local communities, but also provide a substantial contribution to the development of the wider walking and cycling network. 1.8 Overall, I therefore consider that the Project will strongly achieve Project Objective 2, namely to improve safety and accessibility for cycling and walking between Māngere Bridge, Onehunga and Sylvia Park, and accessing Ōtāhuhu East. 1.9 I have considered the submissions related to walking and cycling and responded (some submissions were addressed in my Statement 1 on Traffic and Transport). The majority of issues raised relate to the detailed form and design of the facilities, or connections to other routes. I consider that these design issues can be addressed through a detailed design process, in particular with Auckland Transport. I have addressed this in regard to the suggested changes to Conditions requested by Auckland Transport, in my Statement 1. However, I note in this statement my support for the more targeted investigation of methods to further enhance the quality of the walking and cycling connections on Onehunga Mall, as reflected in designation condition DC11(c) in Ms Hopkins’s evidence. BF\56832919\1 Page 2 2. INTRODUCTION 2.1 My full name is Andrew Peter Murray. I have a BE (Hons) (Civil) from the University of Auckland (1990) and am a Member of the Transportation Group of IPENZ and Committee member of NZ Modelling User Group. 2.2 I currently hold the position of Technical Director at Beca Limited (Beca). I have 26 years’ experience in transportation with core experience in traffic engineering, transportation planning and transport modelling. This is the second of the two statements of primary evidence I have prepared: (a) 1: Assessment of Traffic and Transportation Effects (except walking/cycling) (b) 2: Assessment of walking/cycling facilities 2.3 My qualifications, experience and overall role in the Project are described in Statement 1, so not repeated here. 3. CODE OF CONDUCT 3.1 I confirm that I have read the Code of Conduct for Expert Witnesses contained in the Environment Court Practice Note and that I agree to comply with it. I confirm that I have considered all material facts that I am aware of that might alter or detract from the opinions that I express, and that this evidence is within my area of expertise, except where I state that I am relying on the evidence of another person. 4. SCOPE OF EVIDENCE 4.1 The purpose of my evidence is to assess the effects of the proposed walking and cycling components of the Project, as reflected in Technical Report Traffic and Transport Assessment (TR01) of the AEE. I focus on the transport functionality of the proposed walking and cycling network. Ms Hancock also addresses the connectivity of the pedestrian and cycle network from an urban design perspective, with a focus on amenity and the user experience. 4.2 My evidence is structured as follows: Part A: project description (a) Project Objectives (b) Design Process (c) Overview of Project elements BF\56832919\1 Page 3 Part B: assessment of effects by sector (a) Assessment methodology; (b) An overview of the identified current network issues; (c) Description of the existing environment relevant to my assessment; and (d) Assessment of effects of the Project. Part C: responses (a) Response to section 149G report / other reports; (b) Response to submissions; and (c) Overall conclusions. 4.3 The draft Notice of Requirement (NoR) conditions are included in Ms Hopkin’s evidence and I refer to these in my evidence. I also refer to and have relied on primary evidence provided by: (a) Noel Nancekivell (Design and Constructability); (b) Lynne Hancock (Urban Design); and (c) Scott Wickman (NZ Transport Agency). 4.4 The assessment of transport effects on the existing walking and cycling infrastructure during construction is described in the evidence of Mr Darren Wu. PART A: PROJECT DEVELOPMENT AND DESCRIPTION 5. OVERVIEW OF THE PROJECT AND MY ROLE Role in Project 5.1 My role has been to assist development of the Project, including the assessment of the walking and cycling effects. This has included: (a) Attended consultation workshops meetings with Auckland Transport, Bike Auckland, Auckland Council and Panuku Development Auckland in my capacity as a member of the Project design team. (b) Worked with the Project team in developing the proposed walking and cycling elements, including with the geometric and urban design teams. BF\56832919\1 Page 4 (c) Assessed the impact of the Project on pedestrians and cyclists in the operational phase (post construction); (d) Identified the mitigation required for the adverse effects of the Project; and (e) Forecast the potential usage of the new walking and cycling infrastructure. Objectives of the Project 5.2 The objectives of the Project are described in the NoR and Section 5 of Mr Wickman’s evidence. They are: (a) To improve travel times and travel reliability between businesses in the Onehunga-Penrose industrial areas and SH1 and SH20; (b) To improve safety and accessibility for cycling and walking between Māngere Bridge, Onehunga and Sylvia Park, and accessing Ōtāhuhu East; and (c) To improve journey time reliability for buses between SH20 and Onehunga Town centre.
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Burglars on Bikes Roam Suburbs
    Can the CAB hold its Dr Libby's ground? P12 health tips P31 CourierEast & Bays Your Place, Your Paper Wednesday, September 7, 2016 Pai and Piri drop into Auckland Library Highly-trained pest-detection dogs Pai and Piri, and their handlers Carol and Fin, will be at Auckland Central Library on September 10, 1pm-2pm to tell you about the amazing work they do for Conservation Work. Pai and Piri are a brother and sister team who work for the Department of Conservation. With their handlers, they help keep islands in the Hauraki Gulf pest-free to protect native species like the takahe, stichbird, tui and kereru. Burglars on bikes roam suburbs ELESHA EDMONDS Auckland, particularly in St ‘‘It's definitely a trend and obviously Police are also looking for the Heliers, Kohimarama and owners of stolen property Burglars are believed to be using Mission Bay areas, as well as Mt police are concerned.’’ recovered during a police oper- bikes as getaway vehicles after Wellington and Onehunga. Inspector Andy King ation in Auckland at the end of stealing from houses and cars in ‘‘It’s not a new thing but it’s August. east Auckland. definitely a trend and obviously land during July 2016 which was King says cars broken into The property includes watches Police are warning residents to police are concerned.’’ nearly unchanged from 174 at the while parked in driveways are and jewellery, including a num- contact them if they see King says the offenders are same time last year. now included in the statistics as ber of wedding rings and gold suspicious-looking bike riders taking any property they can find However, according to the burglaries.
    [Show full text]
  • Released Under the Official Information
    Attachment E crassi RELEASED UNDER THE OFFICIALNZ Transport INFORMATION Agency and Auckland ACT Transport East West Connections Project Ecological Assessment to Support Option Selection November 2014 RELEASED UNDER THE OFFICIAL INFORMATION ACT GHD | Report for NZ Transport Agency and Auckland Transport - East West Connections Project, 51/326513/202 | i Table of contents 1. Introduction..................................................................................................................................... 1 1.1 Project Description ............................................................................................................... 1 1.2 Limitations ............................................................................................................................ 4 1.3 Assumptions ........................................................................................................................ 5 2. Assessment Methodology .............................................................................................................. 6 3. Background Information - Existing Environment ............................................................................ 7 4. Key Design Assumptions ............................................................................................................... 8 5. Assessment of Options ................................................................................................................ 10 5.1 Potential Environmental Effects ........................................................................................
    [Show full text]
  • 9 Attachment 1 RLTP JUNE 2021 at Board
    VERSION TO AT BOARD 28 JUNE Auckland Regional Land Transport Plan 2021-2031 Auckland Regional Land Transport Plan 2021–2031 The Regional Land Transport Plan 2021-2031 sets out the land transport objectives, policies and measures for the Auckland region over the next 10 years. It includes the land transport activities of Auckland Transport, Auckland Council, Waka Kotahi NZ Transport Agency, KiwiRail, and other agencies. VERSION TO AT BOARD 28 JUNE 1 Auckland Regional Land Transport Plan 2021–2031 Contents 01. Introduction from the Chair 3 02. Context 5 03. Feedback from consultation 13 04. Purpose and scope 21 05. Transport funding 29 06. Auckland’s transport challenges 33 07. Responding to Auckland’s transport challenges 47 08. Measuring outcomes 77 09. Inter-regional priorities 85 10. Funding and expenditure 91 11. Appendices 99 VERSION TO AT BOARD 28 JUNE 2 Auckland Regional Land Transport Plan 2021–2031 01. Introduction from the Chair VERSION TO AT BOARD 28 JUNE To come 3 Introduction from the Chair Auckland Regional Land Transport Plan 2021–2031 VERSION TO AT BOARD 28 JUNE Introduction from the Chair 4 Auckland Regional Land Transport Plan 2021–2031 02. Context Auckland, Tāmaki Makaurau, is home to 1.7 million people – one third of all NewVERSION Zealanders – and TO is forecast to grow by another 260,000 overAT the BOARD next decade, reaching around 2.4 million by 2050. This 28rapid JUNE population growth presents a number of challenges in our quest to be a liveable, climate-friendly and productive city. Growth represents opportunity but Evidence tells us that Aucklanders Auckland needs a well-coordinated when combined with Auckland’s like the improved experience, and integrated approach to help challenging natural setting and particularly on rapid and frequent people and freight get around urban form the outcome has bus and train services where quickly and safely – one that been increased congestion and the number of trips has almost significantly reduces harm to the limited connectivity.
    [Show full text]
  • Monitoring Market Research Report
    MONITORING REPORT Prepared For Regional Cycle Monitoring Working Group (Co-ordinated by Auckland Regional Transport Authority) MANUAL CYCLE MONITORING IN THE AUCKLAND REGION March 2010 Auckland City Prepared by Gravitas Research and Strategy Limited FINAL VERSION 28th May 2010 TABLE OF CONTENTS 1. AUCKLAND CITY SUMMARY OF RESULTS ..................................................................... 1 1.1 Introduction ................................................................................................................. 1 1.2 Methodology ................................................................................................................ 3 1.3 Summary Of Results ................................................................................................. 12 1.4 Morning Peak Summary Results ............................................................................... 13 1.5 Evening Peak Summary Results ............................................................................... 20 1.6 Aggregated Total Summary Results .......................................................................... 29 1.7 Average Annual Daily Traffic (AADT) Estimate .......................................................... 34 1.8 School Bike Shed Count Summary ............................................................................ 36 2. VICTORIA STREET/WELLESLEY STREET/HALSEY STREET (SITE 1) ......................... 37 2.1 Morning Peak ...........................................................................................................
    [Show full text]
  • Summary of Feedback on the Victoria Street Cycleway
    Summary of feedback on the Victoria Street Cycleway Victoria Street Cycleway feedback report – December 2017 Contents Summary ............................................................................................................................. 3 Major topics in feedback ................................................................................................... 3 Outcome .............................................................................................................................. 3 Next steps ............................................................................................................................ 4 Purpose of this report ......................................................................................................... 5 Project background ............................................................................................................ 5 Consultation ........................................................................................................................ 8 Activities to raise awareness ............................................................................................ 8 Feedback form ................................................................................................................. 8 Respondent demographics ............................................................................................... 9 Feedback ..........................................................................................................................
    [Show full text]
  • Download Original Attachment
    Attachment D East West Connections Report Options shortlisting – preliminary groundwater assessment Prepared for NZTA and Auckland Transport THE ACT Prepared by Beca Ltd UNDER INFORMATION RELEASED OFFICIAL THE ACT UNDER INFORMATION RELEASED OFFICIAL [Document title] Executive Summary The East West Connections project is a joint NZ Transport Agency and Auckland Transport programme to improve freight efficiency, commuter travel, public transport and walking and cycling options over the next 30 years in the area between Onehunga, Penrose, East Tamaki and Auckland Airport. Six options were short- listed for the Onehunga-Penrose connection (a description of each is held in the Detailed Business Case): Option A (Long List Option 1): Existing route upgrade Option B (Long List Option 2): Upgrade with South Eastern Highway Ramp Option C (Long List Option 5): Upgrade with new Galway Street and inland connections Option D (Long List Option 8): Upgrade with Gloucester Park interchange and new Galway St and inland connections Option E (Long List Option 13): New foreshore connection Option F (Long List Option 14): New foreshore and inland connection. This report provides a high level assessment of the effects of the each of the six options on groundwater levels and flow. Groundwater quality is addressed in a separate assessment.THE ACT Existing groundwater levels and flow may be influenced by the project if there are changes to surface water flows and infiltration, where earthworks and subsurface construction require drainage or take place below
    [Show full text]
  • 6 NZ Cycling Conference, 2 November 2007 Diagonal Cycle
    6th NZ Cycling Conference, 2 November 2007 Diagonal cycle crossing for signalised intersection Axel Wilke, Matthew Hinton and Daniel Newcombe Abstract Auckland City Council has developed an innovative cycling proposal to resolve a difficult continuity problem on a significant cycleway currently under construction. The planned State Highway 20 (Mt Roskill) cycleway will run in parallel with the motorway corridor but at its western end the off-road cycleway finishes at a large signalised intersection. Cyclists wishing to continue westwards are presented with the difficult situation of attempting to cross the large and complicated intersection diagonally. This would normally require cyclists to dismount and use two pedestrian phases to reach the desired side of the intersection. Designers ViaStrada and Maunsell have developed an innovative concept, which proposes a diagonal cycle phase to run concurrently with opposing right-turning traffic (i.e. during the ‘single diamond phase’). This is believed to be the first of its kind in NZ, and whilst the concept is described in the Dutch CROW manual, it appears that it has not been tried before in The Netherlands either. This paper will present the concept, and discuss its benefits and risks. This paper has been co-authored by Axel Wilke (ViaStrada), Matthew Hinton (Maunsell) and. Daniel Newcombe (Auckland CC) Contents 1. Introduction.....................................................................................................1 2. Background ....................................................................................................1
    [Show full text]
  • Notice of Require and Application for Consent Was Lodge for the Project December Last Year. • BOI Hearing Late June
    • Notice of Require and application for consent was lodge for the project December last year. • BOI hearing late June • If consents granted construction will start early 2018 • new type of state highway that improves safety for all modes of transport while providing opportunities for significant environmental enhancements. • This not a motorway but a 4 lane arterial road, and needs to balance travel time efficiency with the need for public access across and along the corridor. • The East West Link (EWL) is a new 6.5km state highway between SH1 and SH20 on the northern edge of the Manukau Harbour. It also includes 1 widening of SH1 between Mt Wellington Interchange and the Princes Street Interchange with a new lane in each direction, (refer attached sketch). 1 • To put the location in context • Geographically, the Project is located at the narrowest isthmus of New Zealand, and approximately in the centre of the Auckland urban area. • It is bound on the west by the Manukau Harbour and the east by the Tāmaki River. • The geography of the area has shaped land use, economic activity and the movement/transmission of goods and utilities through this area over time. • Just like in pre European times. It is a key industrial, transport and 2 logistics hub • The GDP and jobs generated by the area are significant and in 2012, the direct Project area accounted for approximately $4.7 billion of output, or 7.5% of Auckland’s total GDP. • The area also represents a significant proportion of the city’s employment and it is one of Auckland’s principal manufacturing locations, accounting for 17.9% Auckland’s, and 5.9% of New Zealand’s manufacturing jobs.
    [Show full text]
  • Submission of the Campaign for Better Transport on Waterview Connection Project
    Environmental Protection Authority Waterview Connection project PO Box 10720 The Terrace Wellington 6143 Submission of the Campaign for Better Transport on Waterview Connection Project 1. Introduction: The Campaign for Better Transport (CBT) is a non-politically aligned group that advocates for sustainable transport policies and projects throughout Auckland and the rest of New Zealand. The CBT regularly advocates for better alignment between land- use planning and its effects on the transport network, better public transport and better walking and cycling facilities. 2. Summary of Submission: The CBT generally opposes the Waterview Connection project. This is for a number of reasons that will be further detailed in this submission. In short: - It is questionable whether the project will achieve the objectives that NZTA have highlighted. - The proposed bus shoulder lanes along State Highway 16 are an inadequate gesture to provide high quality “Quality Transit Network” standard public transport along this route. Suggestions to improve the quality of the lanes are detailed further in the submission. - Further public transport improvements on local arterial roads must form part of this project package, to ensure that the traffic benefits of the project are “locked in” and not lost to induced demand. - Extensions and improvements to the proposed cycle paths are required to ensure the project contributes to multi-modal transport benefits. - The widening of State Highway 16 must be questioned and reassessed, as the documentation accompanying the application states it will not bring any congestion relief benefits – but will cause significant environmental effects. It is also noted that the State Highway 16 works have been “snuck into” this application – which is generally presented as only the Waterview Connection.
    [Show full text]
  • Auckland Regional Land Transport Plan 2021-2031 Auckland Regional Land Transport Plan 2021–2031
    VERSION TO RTC 18 JUNE 2021 Auckland Regional Land Transport Plan 2021-2031 Auckland Regional Land Transport Plan 2021–2031 The Regional Land Transport Plan 2021-2031 sets out the land transport objectives, policies and measures for the Auckland region over the next 10 years. It includes the land transport activities of Auckland Transport, Auckland Council, Waka Kotahi NZ Transport Agency, KiwiRail, and other agencies. VERSION TO RTC 18 JUNE 2021 1 Auckland Regional Land Transport Plan 2021–2031 Contents 01. Introduction from the Chair 3 02. Context 5 03. Feedback from consultation 13 04. Purpose and scope 21 05. Transport funding 27 06. Auckland’s transport challenges 31 07. Responding to Auckland’s transport challenges 45 08. Measuring outcomes 75 09. Inter-regional priorities 83 10. Funding and expenditure 89 11. Appendices 97 VERSION TO RTC 18 JUNE 2021 2 Auckland Regional Land Transport Plan 2021–2031 01. Introduction from the Chair VERSION TO RTC 18 JUNE 2021 To come 3 Introduction from the Chair Auckland Regional Land Transport Plan 2021–2031 VERSION TO RTC 18 JUNE 2021 Introduction from the Chair 4 Auckland Regional Land Transport Plan 2021–2031 02. Context Auckland, Tāmaki Makaurau, is home to 1.7 million people – one third of all New Zealanders – and is forecast to grow by anotherVERSION 260,000 overTO the RTC next decade, 18 JUNE reaching 2021around 2.4 million by 2050. This rapid population growth presents a number of challenges in our quest to be a liveable, climate-friendly and productive city. Growth represents opportunity but Evidence tells us that Aucklanders Auckland needs a well-coordinated when combined with Auckland’s like the improved experience, and integrated approach to help challenging natural setting and particularly on rapid and frequent people and freight get around urban form the outcome has bus and train services where quickly and safely – one that been increased congestion and the number of trips has almost significantly reduces harm to the limited connectivity.
    [Show full text]
  • Cycling Programme Business Case
    Board Meeting| 01 August 2017 Agenda item no. 11.4 Closed Session CONFIDENTIAL Cycling Programme Business Case Recommendation That the Board: i. Endorse the recommended strategic direction for future investment in cycling in Auckland, the funding of which will be subject to prioritisation through the Integrated Transport Programme (ITP). Executive summary 1 There is a significant opportunity for cycling to play a more substantial role in contributing to a more effective transport system for Auckland. During the programme period, transport demands will continue to grow strongly alongside population and employment across the region, placing increasing pressure on congested networks and, in particular, on access to the city centre. 2 We analysed a range of options to identify which package would most effectively deliver the benefits and objectives of the programme, carried out economic modelling and conducted extensive engagement to arrive at a preferred programme of investment. 3 This programme business case recommends an investment of $635m in cycling over the period 2018-2028 to most effectively meet the objectives of the programme. This would provide benefits of $1.9 to $4.6 for every $1 invested, and would deliver 150km of new cycleways linking to key activity centres and maximising access to public transport. The investment would see an increase in modal share of trips to work for cycling from 1 per cent to 4 per cent across the Auckland region. Previous deliberations 4 This item was considered by the Customer Focus Committee on 10 July 2017 and feedback has been incorporated into this report. The updated presentation is attached to this report.
    [Show full text]
  • Agenda of Auckland City Centre Advisory Board
    I hereby give notice that an ordinary meeting of the Auckland City Centre Advisory Board will be held on: Date: Wednesday, 29 November 2017 Time: 3.00pm Room Room 1, Level 26, Venue: 135 Albert Street, Auckland Auckland City Centre Advisory Board OPEN AGENDA MEMBERSHIP Chairperson Mr John Coop Corporate sector Deputy Chair Mr Andrew Gaukrodger Corporate sector Members Ms Viv Beck Business Improvement District Ms Noelene Buckland City Centre Residents Group Member Shale Chambers Waitemata Local Board, Auckland Council Mr Greg Cohen Tourism/Travel Mr Ben Corban Arts and Cultural Sector Mr Terry Cornelius, JP Retail sector Mr George Crawford Property Council of NZ Cr Chris Darby Auckland Council (Mayor’s alternate) Mayor Hon Phil Goff, CNZM, JP Auckland Council Mr Dane Grey/ Mr Ngarimu Blair Ngāti Whātua Ōrākei Mr Mark Kingsford Corporate sector Cr Mike Lee Liaison councillor, Auckland Council Ms Amy Malcolm Tertiary Education (University of Auckland & Auckland University of Technology) Mr James Mooney Urban design/institute of architects Mr Nigel Murphy Tertiary Education (University of Auckland & Auckland University of Technology) Mr Adam Parkinson City Centre Residents Group Mr Patrick Reynolds Transport representative Mr Michael Richardson Business Improvement District (Quorum 10 members) Sonja Tomovska Governance Advisor 23 November 2017 Contact Telephone: 021 723 228 Email: [email protected] Website: www.aucklandcouncil.govt.nz Note: The reports contained within this agenda are for consideration and should not be construed as Council policy unless and until adopted. Should Members require further information relating to any reports, please contact the relevant manager, Chairperson or Deputy Chairperson. Terms of Reference (Excerpt –full terms of reference available as a separate document) These terms of reference set out the roles, responsibilities and working arrangements for the Auckland City Centre Advisory Board.
    [Show full text]